Versions Compared

Version Old Version 3 New Version 4
Changes made by

Owen Stephens

Owen Stephens

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  • Releases
    • Large overhead of a Flower release
      • Product owners and development teams
      • Community testing (bug fest)
    • Balance between stability vs new functionality
    • Deadlines for release cause bottlenecks especially in relation to new modules
    • Overhead for hosting institutions and service providers in managing and upgrading Folio installations
  • Product functionality
    • Ever growing "product" as it's hard to rule out functionality that is useful to at least one library
    • Struggle to have a definition of the 'product' that the "Product Council" is responsible for
      • Determining what should be included in an application's functionality vs extended
      • Determining what is part of a "platform" - FOLIO LSP, ERM, etc... vs. Extended
  • Development processes
    • Difficulty of getting a "Folio" development environment setup
    • Ease with which a new development team can contribute to the system
      • Impacts on our ability to expand as a community
  • Functionality prioritisation and definition
    • Difficulty of recruiting people to join SIGs and POs and lack of clarity as to how these roles contribute to actual functionality that is developed (i.e. a SIG can influence but not decide, a PO without development resource cannot make things happen etc.)
    • Difficulty for PC of managing a roadmap that only reflects what the PC is told is happening, not what the PC would like to happen

How will the proposals help with these issues?

Stakeholders

  • FSE team responsible for flower releases
  • Self hosting institutions (e.g. TAMU)
  • Index data hosting team
  • Service provider marketing teams
  • Institutions using FOLIO LSP
  • Institutions looking at FOLIO LSP as a possible solution...

Questions

  • Would support windows be defined at Application level rather than Platform (or 'release') level?
    • And what does "supported" mean anyway / LTS discussion
    • The new proposed model brings new focus to this question
  • How will versioning of platforms, applications and modules interact and if there is a need to patch a module, how will the patched version get into the application and ultimately the platform (i.e. what is the equivalent of the CSP?)
  • Who would decide what was in the "functionality" vs "extended" tier for a platform?
  • Which platform(s) would the PC be involved in? 
    • If there was an "App Store" what governance would be necessary (probably a very long term question)
  • Is offering all the modules in the "Extended" tier a requirement of saying you support a platform as a service provider? Or is this not relevant as you could simply have a different platform definition
  • What is the need for the "Flower" release - are their product needs to have named releases?
    • Institution to institution conversations
    • Market conversations / marketing purposes
    • What can we learn from Apple naming conventions?
      • Folio Core → OS?
      • Platform Functionality tier → bundled apps (tend to be updated with OS?)
      • Platform Extended tier → user installed apps? 
  • Assuming we answer most or all of the above, what do prioritization and roadmap process(es) look like?  
  • SIGs - will they become App based?
  • POs - will they become App based?

What stage are we at?

General discussion of how to move forward?

...